Re: Rethinking the parameter access hooks for plpgsql's benefit

On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Basically, the same rules apply to all commitfests, i.e. a committer can
>>> apply anything during that period. I think the only restriction for the
>>> last commitfest is that the committer can not apply a new patch that
>>> would have been too big to be submitted to the last commitfest. If
>>> enough people feel that this committer behavior during the last
>>> commitfest is a problem, we can discuss changing that policy.
>
>> One thing that's crystal clear here is that we don't all agree on what
>> the policy actually is.
>
> Indeed. In this case, since the patch in question is one that
> improves/simplifies a patch that's already in the current commitfest,
> I'm going to go ahead and push it. If you want to call a vote on
> revoking my commit bit, go right ahead.

One might almost get the impression you don't think we're all on the
same team, here.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company